Impact of sociodemographic characteristics on underemployment in a longitudinal, nationally representative study of cancer survivors: Evidence for the importance of gender and marital status.

BACKGROUND: We examined the longitudinal association between sociodemographic factors and an expanded definition of underemployment among those with and without cancer history in the United States. METHODS: Medical Expenditure Panel Survey data (2007-2013) were used in multivariable regression analyses to compare employment status between baseline and two-year follow-up among adults aged 25-62 years at baseline (n = 1,614 with and n = 39,324 without cancer). Underemployment was defined as becoming/staying unemployed, changing from full to part-time, or reducing part-time work significantly. Interaction effects between cancer history/time since diagnosis and predictors known to be associated with employment patterns, including age, gender/marital status, education, and health insurance status at baseline were modeled. RESULTS: Approximately 25% of cancer survivors and 21% of individuals without cancer reported underemployment at follow-up (p = 0.002). Multivariable analyses indicated that those with a cancer history report underemployment more frequently (24.7%) than those without cancer (21.4%, p = 0.002) with underemployment rates increasing with time since cancer diagnosis. A significant interaction between gender/marital status and cancer history and underemployment was found (p = 0.0004). There were no other significant interactions. Married female survivors diagnosed >10 years ago reported underemployment most commonly (38.7%), and married men without cancer reported underemployment most infrequently (14.0%). A wider absolute difference in underemployment reports for married versus unmarried women as compared to married versus unmarried men was evident, with the widest difference apparent for unmarried versus married women diagnosed >10 years ago (18.1% vs. 38.7%). CONCLUSION: Cancer survivors are more likely to experience underemployment than those without cancer. Longer time since cancer diagnosis and gender/marital status are critical factors in predicting those at greatest risk of underemployment. The impact of cancer on work should be systematically studied across sociodemographic groups and recognized as a component of comprehensive survivorship care.

Comparison of Comorbid Medical Conditions in the National Cancer Database and the SEER-Medicare Database.

BACKGROUND: Physicians routinely factor comorbidities into diagnostic and treatment decisions. Analyses of treatment patterns and outcomes using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) usually adjust for comorbidities; however, the completeness of comorbidity ascertainment in the NCDB has never been assessed. We compared the prevalence of comorbidities captured in the NCDB and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare among female breast, non-small-cell lung, and colorectal cancer patients aged ≥66. METHODS: In the NCDB, ten fields were searched for comorbidities. In the SEER-Medicare dataset, Medicare claims were used to identify comorbidities for two time periods: 12 months prior to diagnosis (Prior) and Index claim alone. Chi-square tests were used to compare comorbidity prevalence using propensity score-matched subsamples from each dataset. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses by Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score and data source were conducted. RESULTS: Comorbidity prevalence in NCDB did not differ significantly from that identified in SEER-Medicare Index claims across all three cancer sites, except for congestive heart failure, chronic pulmonary disease, and renal disease. However, when compared to the prevalence identified through SEER-Medicare Prior claims, comorbidity prevalence in the NCDB was lower. Overall survival rates by NCDB comorbidity scores were nearly identical to those based on SEER-Medicare Index claims but were lower than those based on SEER-Medicare Prior claims, particularly in higher comorbidity score categories. CONCLUSIONS: The study found overall similarity of comorbidity prevalence between NCDB and SEER-Medicare Index claims, but much less similarity between NCDB and SEER-Medicare Prior claims. Future researchers should understand the limitation of comorbidities ascertained in the NCDB and interpret results accordingly.

Association between urologist characteristics and radiation oncologist consultation for patients with locoregional prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Physicians managing patients with prostate cancer play a critical role in subsequent specialist consultations and initial treatment choice, especially in cases for which no consensus exists regarding optimal treatment strategy. The NCCN Guidelines for Prostate Cancer recommend radiation as a therapy option for patients with locoregional prostate cancer. PURPOSE: The authors examined the association of urologist characteristics with the likelihood that patients would consult radiation oncologists. METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 39,934 patients aged 66 years or older who were diagnosed with locoregional prostate cancer between 2004 and 2007, and the 2405 urologists who performed the patient diagnostic biopsies were constructed using the SEER-Medicare linked database and the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile. Logistic multilevel regression analysis was used to evaluate the influence of urologists' characteristics on radiation oncologist consultation within 9 months of locoregional prostate cancer diagnosis. RESULTS: Overall, 24,549 (61.5%) patients consulted a radiation oncologist. After adjusting for patient and urologist characteristics, patients diagnosed by urologists in noninstitutional settings (eg, physician office) were significantly more likely to consult a radiation oncologist (odds ratio [OR], 1.40; 95% CI, 1.17-1.67; P=.0002) compared with those diagnosed by urologists in institutional settings with a major medical school affiliation. In addition, patients diagnosed by urologists older than 57 years were significantly more likely to consult a radiation oncologist (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.07-1.38, P=.003).

American BRCA Outcomes and Utilization of Testing (ABOUT) study: a pragmatic research model that incorporates personalized medicine/patient-centered outcomes in a real world setting.

Research to date regarding identification and management of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome (HBOC) in the U.S. has been confined primarily to academic center-based studies with limited patient engagement. To begin to understand and address the current gaps and disparities in delivery of services for the appropriate identification and optimal risk management of individuals with HBOC, we designed and have initiated the American BRCA Outcomes and Utilization of Testing (ABOUT) Study. ABOUT relies on a collaborative patient advocacy, academic and industry partnership to recruit and engage U.S. individuals who are at increased risk for HBOC and investigate their experiences, decisions and outcomes. It utilizes an extensive research infrastructure, including an interactive web-based data system and electronic interfaces for secure online participation and automated data exchange. We describe the novel recruitment approach that was designed for collaboration with a national commercial health plan partner to identify all individuals for whom a healthcare provider orders a BRCA test and mail to each individual an invitation to participate and study packet. The study packet contains detailed information about the study, a baseline questionnaire and informed consent for participation in the study, for release of relevant medical and health plan records and for ongoing research engagement. This approach employs patient-reported, laboratory-reported and health plan-reported outcomes and facilitates longitudinal engagement. We believe that the type of innovative methodology and collaborative framework we have developed for ABOUT is an ideal foundation for a patient-powered research network. This approach can make substantial contributions to identifying current and best practices in HBOC, leading to improved strategies for clinical care and optimal health outcomes among individuals with high inherited risk for cancer.

Diagnosis date agreement between SEER and Medicare claims data: impact on treatment.

BACKGROUND: A prior assessment of concordance between the diagnosis month in SEER records and Medicare claims found reasonable agreement; however, no assessment of the impact of discordance on cancer treatment ascertainment was conducted. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the concordance between the SEER diagnosis date (Sdx) and Medicare claim-derived diagnosis date and the impact of discordance on identification of treatment received. METHODS: The first Medicare claim date with a cancer diagnosis (Mdx) was compared with the Sdx among patients diagnosed with breast, colorectal, or lung cancer. The Mdx was considered concordant with the Sdx if the Mdx was within 16 days. Claims within 4 months after both the Mdx and Sdx were examined to collect treatment information. Treatment rate agreement was measured by κ-statistics. RESULTS: Among 50,731 breast, 51,025 colorectal, and 61,384 lung cancer patients, the Sdx and Mdx were concordant in 79%, 86%, and 73% of cases, respectively. Most discordant Mdx cases were identified in the month after the SEER diagnosis month. A small proportion of cases (7%-12%) preceded the SEER diagnosis month. Agreement for receipt of surgery was very good across all 3 cancer sites (κ>0.88) and was excellent for radiation therapy (κ>0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Although most cases were concordant for both diagnosis date and treatment ascertainment, there was still a small proportion of cases discordant for both diagnosis date and treatment identification. This study underscores the importance of examining claims in the months preceding diagnosis in the SEER-Medicare dataset to ensure patients are appropriately selected for analysis.

Annual patient time costs associated with medical care among cancer survivors in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Although patient time costs are recommended for inclusion in cost-effectiveness analyses, these data are not routinely collected. We used nationally representative data and a medical service-based approach to estimate the annual patient time costs among cancer survivors. METHODS: We identified adult 6699 cancer survivors and 86,412 individuals without a cancer history ages 18 years or more from 2008-2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). Service use was categorized as hospitalizations, emergency room use, provider visits, ambulatory surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy. Service time estimates were applied to frequencies for each service category and the US median wage rate in 2011 was used to value time. We evaluated the association between cancer survivorship and service use frequencies and patient time costs with multivariable regression models, stratified by age group (18-64 and 65+ y). Sensitivity analyses evaluated different approaches for valuing time. RESULTS: Cancer survivors were more likely to have hospitalizations, emergency room visits, ambulatory surgeries, and provider visits in the past year than individuals without a cancer history in adjusted analyses (P<0.05). Annual patient time was higher for cancer survivors than individuals without a cancer history among those aged 18-64 years (30.2 vs. 13.6 h; P<0.001) and 65+ years (55.1 vs. 36.6 h; P<0.001), as were annual patient time costs (18-64 y: $500 vs. $226; P<0.001 and 65+ y: $913 vs. $607; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Cancer survivors had greater annual medical service use and patient time costs than individuals without a cancer history. This medical service-based approach for estimating annual time costs can also be applied to other conditions.

Medical costs and productivity losses of cancer survivors--United States, 2008-2011.

The number of persons in the United States with a history of cancer has increased from 3 million in 1971 to approximately 13.4 million in 2012, representing 4.6% of the population. Given the advances in early detection and treatment of cancer and the aging of the U.S. population, the number of cancer survivors is projected to increase by >30% during the next decade, to approximately 18 million. Cancer survivors face many challenges with medical care follow-up, managing the long-term and late effects of treatments, monitoring for recurrence, and an increased risk for additional cancers. These survivors also face economic challenges, including limitations in work and daily activities, obtaining health insurance coverage and accessing health care, and increasing medical care costs. To estimate annual medical costs and productivity losses among male and female cancer survivors and persons without a cancer history, CDC, along with other organizations, analyzed data from the 2008-2011 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS), sponsored by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. The results indicate that the economic burden of cancer survivorship is substantial among all survivors. For male cancer survivors, during 2008-2011, average annual medical costs and productivity losses resulting from health problems per person and adjusted to 2011 dollars were significantly higher among cancer survivors than among persons without a cancer history, by $4,187 and $1,459, respectively; for females, the estimated annual costs per person were $3,293 and $1,330 higher among cancer survivors than among persons without a cancer history, respectively. These findings suggest the need to develop and evaluate health and employment intervention programs aimed at improving outcomes for cancer survivors and their families.

Health care policy and cancer survivorship.

The United States and the European Union (EU) vary widely in approaches to ensuring affordable health care coverage for our respective populations. Such variations stem from differences in the political systems and beliefs regarding social welfare. These variations are also reflected in past and future initiatives to provide high quality cancer survivorship care. The United States spends considerably more on health care compared to most European countries, often with no proven benefit. In the United States, individuals with chronic illnesses, such as cancer survivors, often experience difficulties affording insurance and maintaining coverage, a problem unknown to EU countries with national health insurance. This article reviews health policy development over time for the United States and EU and the impact for cancer survivors. For the United States, the impact of the Affordable Care Act on improving access to affordable care for cancer survivors is highlighted. For the EU, the importance of multiple-morbidity disease management, cancer plan development, and pan-European data collection for monitoring cancer outcomes is addressed. Given predicted workforce shortages and ever-increasing numbers of aging cancer survivors on both sides of the Atlantic, sharing lessons learned will be critical.

Determinants of the combined use of external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy for low-risk, clinically localized prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer treatment choices have been shown to vary by physician and patient characteristics. For patients with low-risk, clinically localized prostate cancer, the authors examined the impact of their clinical, sociodemographic, and radiation oncologists' (RO) characteristics on the likelihood that the patients would receive combined external beam radiotherapy and brachytherapy, a treatment regimen that is at variance with clinical guidelines. METHODS: The Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked database and the American Medical Association Physician Masterfile were used in a retrospective analysis of 5531 patients with low-risk, clinically localized prostate cancer who were diagnosed between 2004 and 2007, and the 708 ROs who treated them. Hierarchical logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the relationship between patient and RO characteristics and the use of combined therapy within 6 months of diagnosis. RESULTS: Overall, 356 patients (6.4%) received combined therapy. Nonclinical factors were found to be associated with combined therapy. After adjusting for patient and RO characteristics, the odds of receiving combined therapy for patients residing in Georgia were found to be significantly greater than for all other SEER regions. Black patients were significantly less likely to receive combined therapy (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.96 [P= .03]) compared with white patients. In addition, ROs accounted for 36.6% of the variation in patients receiving combined therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Geographic and sociodemographic factors were found to be significantly associated with guideline-discordant combined therapy for patients diagnosed with low-risk, clinically localized prostate cancer. Which RO a patient consults is important in determining whether they receive combined therapy.

Physicians' beliefs about breast cancer surveillance testing are consistent with test overuse.

BACKGROUND: Overuse of surveillance testing for breast cancer survivors is an important problem but its extent and determinants are incompletely understood. The objectives of this study were to determine the extent to which physicians' breast cancer surveillance testing beliefs are consistent with test overuse, and to identify factors associated with these beliefs. METHODS: During 2009-2010, a cross-sectional survey of US medical oncologists and primary care physicians (PCPs) was carried out. Physicians responded to a clinical vignette ascertaining beliefs about appropriate breast cancer surveillance testing. Multivariable analyses examined the extent to which test beliefs were consistent with overuse and associated with physician and practice characteristics and physician perceptions, attitudes, and practices. RESULTS: A total of 1098 medical oncologists and 980 PCPs completed the survey (response rate 57.5%). Eighty-four percent of PCPs [95% confidence interval (CI), 81.4%-86.5%] and 72% of oncologists (95% CI, 69.8%-74.7%) reported beliefs consistent with blood test overuse, whereas 50% of PCPs (95% CI, 47.3%-53.8%) and 27% of oncologists (95% CI, 23.9%-29.3%) reported beliefs consistent with imaging test overuse. Among PCPs, factors associated with these beliefs included smaller practice size, lower patient volume, and practice ownership. Among oncologists, factors included older age, international medical graduate status, lower self-efficacy (confidence in knowledge), and greater perceptions of ambiguity (conflicting expert recommendations) regarding survivorship care. CONCLUSIONS: Beliefs consistent with breast cancer surveillance test overuse are common, greater for PCPs and blood tests than for oncologists and imaging tests, and associated with practice characteristics and perceived self-efficacy and ambiguity about testing. These results suggest modifiable targets for efforts to reduce surveillance test overuse.

Surgery for constipation in patients with prior spinal cord injury: the Department of Veterans Affairs experience.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) typically have difficulty with constipation. Some undergo surgery for bowel management. We predicted that SCI patients would have higher mortality and/or morbidity rates following such surgery than neurally intact patients receiving the same procedures. We sought to evaluate this using a large population-based data set. METHODS: Patients receiving care at Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (DVAMCs) with computer codes for SCI and constipation who later underwent colectomy, colostomy, or ileostomy during fiscal years 1993-2002 were identified. Charts were requested from the VAMCs where the surgery had been performed and a retrospective chart review of these charts was done. We collected data on patient demographics, six specific pre-operative co-morbidities, surgical complications, and post-operative mortality. Comparisons were made to current literature evaluating a population receiving total abdominal colectomy and ileorectal anastomosis for constipation but not selected for SCI. RESULTS: Of 299 patients identified by computer search, 43 (14%) had codes for SCI and 10 of 43 (24%) met our inclusion criteria. All were symptomatic and had received appropriate medical management. Co-morbid conditions were present in 9 of 10 patients (90%). There were no deaths within 30 days. The complication rate was zero. The mean post-operative length of stay was 17 days. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with SCI comprise about 14% of the population who receive surgery for severe constipation in the Department of Veterans Affairs system. The mortality and morbidity rates in these patients are similar to those reported in other constipated patients who have surgery for intractable constipation. Our data suggest that stoma formation ± bowel resection in patients with SCI is a safe and effective treatment for chronic constipation.

Receipt of locoregional therapy among young women with breast cancer.

Although younger women with breast cancer have the most to gain from receipt of optimal care, few data are available regarding their receipt of locoregional breast cancer treatments. We identified 317,596 women aged 18-64 who were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at hospitals reporting to the National Cancer Database, a large national cancer registry, during 2004-2008. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the association of patient age with mastectomy versus breast-conserving surgery (BCS), radiation with BCS, and postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) with varying indications, adjusting for patient, clinical, and facility characteristics. Overall, 4 % of women were 35 years old or younger and 7 % were 36-40 years old. Women ≤age 40 were significantly more likely to have mastectomy than BCS compared with older women (57 % for age ≤35 and 52 % for ages 36-40 vs. 35 % for ages 61-64, adjusted odds ratio [OR] for age ≤35 = 2.03; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.93-2.14 and OR for ages 36-40 = 1.76; 95 % CI 1.69-1.84). Younger women were less likely to receive radiation if BCS was performed (69 and 73 vs. 80 %, OR for age ≤35 = 0.69; 95 % CI 0.65-0.74 and OR for ages 36-40 = 0.74; 95 % CI 0.70-0.78). For those who underwent mastectomy, overall rates of PMRT were low, although women ≤age 35 and ages 36-40 (vs. ages 61-64) were more likely to receive PMRT regardless of clinical indications. Our study suggests that young women with breast cancer may not be receiving optimal locoregional therapy. Efforts are needed to confirm these findings, further understand barriers to care, and increase the receipt of appropriate adjuvant radiation therapy among young women to improve their disease-free and overall survival.

Association of insurance status and age with cervical cancer stage at diagnosis: National Cancer Database, 2000-2007.

OBJECTIVES: We examined the relationship of age at diagnosis and insurance status with stage among cervical cancer patients aged 21 to 85 years. METHODS: We selected data on women (n = 69 739) diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer between 2000 and 2007 from the National Cancer Database. We evaluated the association between late stage (stage III/IV) and both insurance and age, with adjustment for race/ethnicity and other sociodemographic and clinical factors. We used multivariable log binomial models to estimate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: The proportion of late-stage disease increased with age: from 16.53% (21-34 years) to 42.44% (≥ 70 years). The adjusted relative risk of advanced-stage disease among women aged 50 years and older was 2.2 to 2.5 times that of patients aged 21 to 34 years. Uninsured (RR = 1.44; 95% CI = 1.40, 1.49), Medicaid (RR = 1.37, 95% CI = 1.34, 1.41), younger Medicare (RR = 1.12, 95% CI = 1.06, 1.19), and older Medicare (RR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.15, 1.26) patients had a higher risk of late-stage disease than did privately insured patients. CONCLUSIONS: Screening should be encouraged for women at high risk for advanced-stage disease.

Ovarian cancer patient surveillance after curative-intent initial treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Patient surveillance after potentially curative treatment of ovarian carcinoma has important clinical and financial implications for patients and society. The optimal intensity of surveillance for these patients is unknown. We aimed to document the current follow-up practice patterns of gynecologic oncologists. METHODS: We created four idealized vignettes describing patients with stages I-III ovarian cancer. We mailed a custom-designed survey instrument based on the vignettes to the members of the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists (SGO). SGO members were asked, via this instrument, how often they requested 11 discrete follow-up evaluations for their patients for the first 10 postoperative years after treatment with curative intent. RESULTS: We received 283 evaluable responses (30%) from the 943 SGO members and candidate members. The most frequently performed items for each year were office visit, pelvic examination, and serum CA-125 level. Imaging studies such as chest X-ray, abdominal-pelvic CT, chest CT, abdominal-pelvic MRI, and transvaginal ultrasound were rarely recommended. There was marked variation in the frequency of use of most tests. There was a decrease in the frequency of testing over time for all modalities. CONCLUSION: This dataset provides detailed documentation of the self-reported surveillance practices of highly credentialed experts who manage patients with ovarian cancer in the 21st century. The optimal follow-up strategy remains unknown and controversial. Our survey showed marked variation in surveillance intensity. Identifying the sources of this variation warrants further research.

Employment Outcomes Among Cancer Survivors in the United States: Implications for Cancer Care Delivery.

The national prevalence of employment changes after a cancer diagnosis has not been fully documented. Cancer survivors who worked for pay at or since diagnosis (n = 1490) were identified from the 2011, 2016, and 2017 Medical Expenditure Panel Survey and Experiences with Cancer supplement. Analyses characterized employment changes due to cancer and identified correlates of those employment changes. Employment changes were made by 41.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 38.0% to 44.6%) of cancer survivors, representing more than 3.5 million adults in the United States. Of these, 75.4% (95% CI = 71.3% to 79.2%) took extended paid time off and 46.1% (95% CI = 41.6% to 50.7%) made other changes, including switching to part-time or to a less demanding job. Cancer survivors who were younger, female, non-White, or multiple races and ethnicities, and younger than age 20 years since last cancer treatment were more likely to make employment changes. Findings highlight the need for patient-provider communication about the effects of cancer and its treatment on employment.